Often, when people tell us what it would take for them to fall in love, they  will give attributes of their potential beloved.  As if the beloved must prove his or her worthiness.

As in, "I will love you, if you do these things for/to me.  But if you don’t, or start to do these other things, which I don’t like, I 'can't' (read: 'won't')  continue to love you."  As if one's love is a reward for good behavior on the part of the beloved. 

This can be true in the case of Love: The Decision, which can be conditional, but Love: The Passionate, for instance, has nothing to do with the personality or "qualifications" of the beloved. 

Or, when asked "what is love?"  They will reply, "when he does this for me,"  or,  "when she does that to me,"  or "when he does not do this," et cetera.  Their definition being very focused on what they will receive, and how that will make them feel loved.  It is a passive definition. 

Those with this kind of a definition, are usually those who have never truly loved, or been in love, I find.  They are waiting to be loved by someone else, before they will dare to love, only in return. 

Some kinds of love are a state of being in which the lover resides.  Other kinds must be actively given to the beloved, in order to be satisfied.  A love, which only comes when the possessor of that love is being loved by another first, seems weaker to me.  Too dependent on someone else’s behavior, for it’s existence. 

Therefore, I believe that this sort of love alone is inadequate to sustain a loving relationship.  If both members in a relationship only have a love which only comes if loved first, then how can the love be sustained?  There are no initiators, only reactors. 

However, if one of the partners possessed a love which exists whether or not the beloved was "worthy" of the love, or even loved in return, that could be sufficient to sustain a loving relationship.  One initiator and one responder.  However, since one of the partners is loving in a conditional manner, the initiator must work extra hard to be sure to please, and not offend, the responder.  But of course, the initiator is motivated to do this, so he or she does not mind.  With this kind of relationship, success is likely, but not guaranteed. 

The greatest loving relationships exist when both partners love unconditionally.  Both are actively thinking of ways to help and please the other, without much thought of what they are getting for it, in return.  Each is in the relationship primarily for the welfare of the other, not so that they can feel loved themselves.  They are, of course, overjoyed to receive love from the other, but for them, giving love is how they are satisfied, not receiving it. 

For indeed, to love is to give.  To be in a relationship for the sole purpose of receiving love is selfish.  And, relationships, wherein the participants only give things to their partner for what the will get back for it, are also based on selfish motivation.  And selfishness is the antithesis of love. 

To truly love, one must choose to risk everything and become absolutely vulnerable.  Countless people have had their hearts broken this way, but countless more have never had their hearts healed, because they would not risk enough.  Love heals!   It's miraculous! 

Lovers may break our hearts, but only love can truly heal it.

To achieve the ultimate love takes the ultimate sacrifice. 
I'd rather love without life, than live without love.

 As Erica Jong said, 
"Do you want me to tell you something really subversive?  Love is really all it's cracked up to be.  That's why people are so cynical about it...  It really is worth fighting for, being brave for, risking everything for.  And the problem is, if you don't risk everything, you risk even more."

And as Mahatma Gandhi said, 
"A coward is incapable of exhibiting love.  It is the prerogative of the brave."

I have been wounded, to the very core of my soul.  And I did say that to myself, for a while.  But then, I got a powerful revelation of what the true, pure essence of Love was like, and so I no longer threw the baby out with the bath water.   And the love I now possess, has healed my wound, and filled my heart with hope again! 

Love itself is pure.  Our human experience with it, however, is practically never completely pure.  "Love hurts," they say.  It can be painful, but Love does not cause harm. 

As Saint Paul wrote: 
"Love does no harm to it's neighbor."

Tom Robbins wrote: 
"The bottom line is that: (a) people are never perfect, but love can be; (b) that is the one and only way that the mediocre and vile can be transformed; and (c) doing that makes it that.  We waste time looking for the perfect lover, instead of creating the perfect love."

Love makes you beautiful.